Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-03-09March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meeting) 08'? A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held at 9:00 A.M. on March 9, 1977, in the Board Room of the County Office Building, Char!ottesvil] Virginia. Present: Mrs. Opal D. David and Messrs. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony Iachetta and W. S. Roudabush. Absent: None. Officers Present: County Attorney. Agenda Item No. 1. Fisher. Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive and Mr. George R. St. John, The meeting was called to order at 9:06 A.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Agenda Item No. 2. Appointment: Extension Agent. Mr. Jim Butler, County Agent, was present and introduced Mr. Donald R. Bowman to the Board. Mr. Fisher read into the record the Advisory Committee's recommendation for the appointment of Mr. Bowman as Extension Agent. ~0OP¥._~ON FILE IN CLERK'S OFFICE.) Mr. Henley offered motion to appoint Mr. Donald R. Bowman as Extension Agent; effective April 1, 1977. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Items ~o. 3, 4a and 4b. (To be discussed later in the meeting.) Agenda Item No. 4c. Letters Accepting Streets Into the Secondary System. Mr. Agnor read the following letters into the record: "February 23, 1977 As requested in resolution by your Board on January 19, 1977, the following addition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County is hereby approved, effective February 23, 1977. ADDITION LENGTH Extension of Route 698 - From: The northern terminus of existing Route 698, 200 feet to the north. 0.038 Mi." "February 28, 1977 As requested in resolution by your Board on July 14, 1976, the following additions to the Secondary System of Albemarle County are hereby approved effective February 1, 1977. ADDITIONS IVY FARMS SUBDIVISION Fox Run Lane - From: Ivy Farm Drive - From: LENGTH Ivy Farm Drive; To: End of cul-de-sac. 0.21 Mi. State Route 628; To: End of cul-de-sac. 0.96 Mi.'T Agenda Item No. 4d. Other Highway Matters. Mr. Agnor noted that the reconstruction of Route 637, the road to the Ivy Landfill, will not begin until OCtober, He also noted that the drainage easements which have delayed the acceptance of Fbur~Seasons roads into the Secondary System have been cleared and are to be recorded on March 11, 1977. Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer for the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, was present and said lack of maintenance as well as faulty construction caused the roads in Four Seasons to deteriorate. Deterioratior such as the sidewalk sinking away from the curb, etc., is occurring. A final maintenance inspection is still required and he felt the problems needed to be discussed in detail. He suggested the County Engineer and a Board member go with him to look at these problems. Mr. Dorrier asked if the developer could be required to pay for the correction of these problems. Mr. St. John said the bond has been used and the developer is gone. H~ders~dod that if certain improvements were made with the proceeds of the bond that the roads would be accepted into the state system. A representative from the Highway Department helped set the bond after reviewing the plans and Mr. St. John did not feel the County could have done much more. Mr. Fisher did not feel the County could take any more action on this matter and did not feel the County had any leverage left. Mr. Roosevelt said the agreement was if certain things were done, the roads would be accepted into the State System but the major.~ problem is with the sidewalks. These were not done to proper standards and he did not feel the project was ever closely inspected. Some of the work was done by the developer and some with the bond money. Mr. Roudabush said the work with the bond money was under the guidance of the Highway Department. Mr. Roosevelt disagreed. Mrs. David recollected Mr. Roosevelt stating that if the repairs that were needed were done, he would reluctantly and with reservations recommend that the Four Seasons Roads be accepted into the state system. Mr. St. John asked if the highway department is now saying that the roads will not be accepte( March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meetin~ because the roads would then'become the highway department's responsibility and they are not built to state standards,~ However, maybe an agreement could be worked out to maintain the items which are to standards and leave the others to someone else. Mr. J. Harvey Bailey~ County Engineer and Dr. Iachetta were requested to meet with Mr. Roosevelt to review the roads. , , , , , Mr. Roosevelt brought to the Board's attention the annual primary interstate urban allocation hearing to be held for the Culpeper District on April 15, 1977, at 10:00 A.M. at the Culpeper Highway Department Office. He noted this being a time for different localities to express their views about primary, interstate, arterial, and urban improvements which they would like to have considered for allocations. He felt this hearing would be an appropr~ time for the Board to express their concern about Route 29 North. , , , , , Mr. Henley asked if the sharp curve going Uphill on Route 680 from Mechums River to White Hall could be improved by widening the road. Mr. Roosevelt said he had submitted a letter which covered the largest demands for improvements to secondary roads in the County and if this improvement were made, some other project would have to be reduced or deferred. He suggested waiting until after the annual highway hearing to see if funds were available for this project. Mr. Roudabush noted a petition signed by 30 residents of Key West Drive (formerly Ridge Road) in Key West Subdivision. Ail of the roads in Key W~at that w~re originally platted have been taken into the state system excluding this road. The residents are concerned that with development proceeding in that direction, this road will never be improved so it can be taken into the system. Mr. Roudabush said the developer has stated that he intends to improve the road when he completes the last section but there is no assurance this will occur. The residents, are concerned that development will cease and the road will not be improved. Since this is an old road, perhaps the current standards would not have to be applied. One problem which exists is the road crossing the dam which makes it difficult to persuade the Highway Department to accept into the State System. He asked if there was some way to require that the developer improve the road as the other sections are developed. Mrs. C. Knight Aldrich, resident of Key West Drive (formerly Ridge Road), was present and noted that there are no vacant lots along the road. She felt the problem,occurred due to lack of responsibility on the part of the developer. Mr. Roudabush felt the first step would be asking Mr. Roosevelt to look at the road with him to see what minimum improvements would be required, an estimation of these improvements and to determine if the property owners or the developer would have to absorb the costs. Mrs. Aldrich said the developer has been promising improvements for thirteen years. Mr. Roudabush noted that these would be the only two alternatives since the County does not have funds for such improvements and the highway department's policy is for someone else to build subdivision streets before they will take them over. Mrs. Aldrich asked if the building on the undeveloped land pa~t the present end of Key West Drive could be terminated until the road is taken care of. Mr. Roudabush said that is an alternative but since there are no vacant lots in the area a moratorium on building permits could not be placed in another section. Mr. Roudabush request. Mr. Jack Schwab be invited to the April 13 meeting to discuss~this matter further. Dr. Iachetta asked Mr Roosevelt to look at the surface of West Park Drive in HesSian Hills. Mrs. David asked that attention be given to Route 601, the back entrance of Farmington, which has a fair amount of traffic and several bad holes in the surface of the road. Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission has not come to a co~census on the service road concept. Several priorities recommended were a third lane on 29 North, interchanges at major intersections, such as Hydraulic Road, Rio Road and Berkmar Drive. .The matter has been deferred pending the Highway Department's study on the Fashion Mall which is to be located on Route 29. It is hoped that this study may provide the planning Commission some insight on improvements to Route 29. ~ Mr. HOosevelt said since funds are now available, easements recorded and stone and materials ordered, he would request a resolution to accept the roads in Airport Acres into the State System. Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, ~Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation. be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the. Resident Highway Department~ the following roads'in Airport Acres Subdivision: Beginning'at a point common to the western right-of-way margin of U.S. Route 29 and Lake Road at the northeast ,corner of Lot 1, Block B (subsequently Lot IA, Block B, Deed Book 357-146) and the southeast corner of Lot 1, Block A; thence in a westerly, northerly and southerly direction approximately 4,771 feet to the western right-of-way margin of U.S. Route 29 a point common to Lot 21, Block B and Lot 5, Block A as recorded in Deed Book 350-193. ~te M~rch 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meeting) Beginning at a point common to the eastern right-of-way margin of Woodland Road (SUbsequently Lake Road) and the southeast corner of Lot 13A, Block A and the northwest corner of Lot llA, Block B; thence with unnamed 40 foot road 300 feet to a cul-de-sac as recorded in Deed Book 358-541. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right of way along these requested additions as recorded by plats in the Of£ice of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 350, page 193; Deed Book 352, page 75; Deed Book 357, page 146; Deed Book 364; page 505, Deed Book 365, page 165; Deed Book 379, page 42i; Deed Book 381, page 457; and Deed Book 398, page 5. Also~ guarantee a 40..foot unobstructed right of way along unnamed 40 foot road as recorded by plat i~ the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 358, page 541. Dr. Iachetta seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Dr. Iachetta noted request received from Dr. Michael Demetsky in the Berkeley Subdivisior to vacate a right of way off of Dominion Drive. The street is deteriorating from the traffic using it as a turnaround or to enter Four Seasons. The subject property is located between Lot 1, Block 5, Section 1, 2221 Dominion Drive and Lot 11, Block 4, 2219 Dominion Drive. Mr. Fisher said if the right of way serves properties, it wilt be difficult to abandon and felt the Planning Department should review the matter. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to request the Planning staff and Commission to review the request and an ordinance be drafted and advertised for a public hearing on April 13 with notification of all adjacent property owners. Mrs. David seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 4a. Request to vacate plat. Mr. Joseph Richmond, Jr., was present and requested Kaskaskia Court, road in Key West Subdivision, be vacated so it can become a part of the adjacent lot which is owned by Alcova Associates. The road has never been opened and there is no intention to ever open it. He noted that Kaskaskia Court abuts one property owner, Mr. Harry Gart~h who has agreed to convey his interest in this road to Alcova Associates. Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to request the Planning staff and commission to review the request and an ordinance be drafted and advertised for a public hearing on April 13 with notification to all adjacent property owners. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 4b. Request for Street Signs. Mr. Agnor noted request received from Mrs. Harold Patterson for street signs to identify Garth Road. Mrs. Patterson was present and felt a sign with the name of Garth Road would be very helpful. Motion was then offered by Mrs. David to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS request has been received for street signs to identify the following roads: Garth Road (State Route 601) at its intersection with State Route 654 at Ivy Creek. Garth Road (State Route 676) at its intersection with State Route 6i4 in Owensville. WHEREAS a citizen has agreed to purchase these signs through the office of the County Executive and to conform to standards set by the State Department of Highways and Transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and the same is hereby requested to install and maintain the above mentioned street signs. Mr. Dorrier seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Agnor then noted request received from Mr. A. Gordon Col!ey, representing the Board of Directors for the Berkeley Community Association for streets signs to be erected in Berkeley. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS request has been received for street signs to identify the following roads: Dominion Drive (State Route 851) and Commonwealth Drive (State Route 852) at its northern intersection Dominion Drive (State Route 851) and Commonwealth Drive (State Route 852) at its southern intersection Commonwealth Drive (State Route 852) and Commonwealth Circle (State Route 1454) at its northern intersection Commonwealth Drive (State Route 852) and Commonwealth Circle (State Route 1454) at its southern intersection Commonwealth Drive (State Route 852) and Providence Road (State Route 863) at its intersection Commonwealth Drive (State Route 852) and Williamsburg Road (State Route 862) at its intersection Williamsburg Road (State Route 862) and Providence Road (State Route 863) at its intersection. WHEREAS, the Berkeley Association has agreed to purchase these signs through the office of the County Executive and to conform to standards set by the State Department of Highways and Transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and the same is hereby requested to install and maintain the above mentioned street signs. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 5. Other Matters Not on the Agenda From the Public. Mr. Drewry Brown, Director of MACAA Multi-Purpose Service Center, was present and noted that under the new guidelines of the Youth Program, an advisory council has to be formed. He asked the Board to appoint someone interested in the Youth Program to serve on this council. Mr. Dorrier said he would make a recommendation at the next Board meeting. Dr. Iachetta then read the following letter from the Board of Directors of Berkeley Community Association into the record: "2515 Commonwealth Drive Char!ot~esville, Virginia March 7, 1977 22901 Mr. J. Harvey Bailey County Engineer 414 East Market Street Charlottesville, Virginia Dear Mr. Bailey: 22901 The Board of Directors of the Berkeley Community Association requests that the County conduct a survey of street lighting in Berkeley and authorize Vl:rginia Electric and ?over Company to modify or add to the existing street lights to improve illumination of our streets. Numerous residents have complained to this Board of Directors about the inadequate lighting which presently exists. We understand that all residents to be directly or indirectly affected by the placement of !ights~must agree to the installation of those fixtures. We also realize that the Association may be required to underwrite a portion of the cost of installation of these fixtures. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely yours, (Signed) A. Gordon Col~ey, III internal Affairs Director" Dr. Iachetta then gave the letter to the County Executive for the staff's review. Agenda Item No. 3. Approval of Minutes: March 24 (Afternoon), March 24 (Night), March 31, April 6, April 7 (Afternoon), April 7 (Night), April 22, April 26, May 24 (Afternoon) and May 26, 1976. March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meeting) between "rezoning" and "the"; March 31, 1976, page 122, seventh paragraph from the bottom of the page, delete the first sentence and insert the following ."It was noted that Mrs. Ellen Craddock having resigned as a member of the Albemarle County Planning Commission resignation is effective this date." Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to approve the minutes with the above corrections. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same carried by the following recordec vote: ~ AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to defer the minutes of May 24 and May 26, 1976 to the March 16 meeting. Mr. Henley seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 7. F.H.A. Contract-Inspections. Mr. Agnor said the contract which was approved by the Board on August 11, 1976, was reviewed by the attorney for the Office of the General Counsel for Farmer's Home Administrati Three amendments were recommended to the contract and such was discussed with Mr. St. John, who incorporated the amendments into the contract by adding the following wording: Add the following sentence to paragraph 2 of the contract - "The parties stipulate and agree that the obligation of the County hereunder shall be limited to the performance of the inspections described on Attachments "A" and "B" hereto and that in no event shall any County employee perform any inspection, including any final inspection, which is required by law to be ~ by agents of the Administration."; Add new paragraph #5 to read as follows: "It is expressly understood that the inspections carried out pursuant hereto shall be for the sole benefit of the parties, or either of them, as the case may be, and not for the benefit of ~any third party., inc~i~g but not limited to, any owner, present or future, of the premises inspected."; and renumber the remaining paragraphs. The three amendments provide for the following: a) A provision governing the liability for injuries incurred by county employees in performing the inspections or to county employees injured on the way to or from inspection b) That the inspections conducted by the county employees ara for the benefit of the Farmers Home Administration, and not for the benefit of any third party such'as the homeowner; and c) That county employees cannot and'will not conduct final inspections for the benefit of Farmers Home Administration. Upon the recommendation of the County Executive, motion was offered by Mrs. David to approve the contract with the amendments as stated above. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, HenleY, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Agenda It.em No. 6. Elizabeth ?ayne - Report from County Extension Office. Mr. james Butler, County Agent, was present to present the report since Mrs. Payne was unable to attend. He said the staff of the office is composed of five agents and six technic~ who deal with expanding nutrition for limited resource families. He summarized the objective of the office which are divided into five major areas; Family Resources, Agriculture, 4-H, Community Resource Development and Technical Services. Contact is made with families by phone, meetings, information and personal visits which totaled 56~434 during the 1975,76 year. Mr. Butler noted the staff is rated in the top four of the twenty units in the eastern central district. Mr. Dorrier asked if any funding would be needed for the garden project. Mr. Butler said the Family Resource Department feels they will be able to take care of the program and he emphasized the importance of this program. Agenda Item No. 11. Contract-Real. Estate Reassessment of 1978. Mr. Agnor said another real estate reassessment will begin in the fall to be completed by January 1979. He had asked Wingate Appraisal Service flor a proposal. The firm presented such to Mr. Bradshaw and himself in December of 1976. Mr. Harold Wingate has requested action on the proposal by April 1 in order to schedule work if the proposal is accepted. The proposal is to perform reassessment on 9,000 parcels for a total cost of $76,500 which averages $8.50 per parcel. Mr. Agnor said in a memo.from Mr. Bradshaw (dated December 17, 1976) a comparison is given on the cost per parcel if the County had a full time staff to conduct this work and a comparison of the costs ov'er the last two reassessments. Mr. Bradsha felt it would require three additional appraisers. Mr. Agnor recommended the acceptance of the proposal for the following reasons: 1) Wingate Appraisal Service has done work in Albemarle County over a period of reassessments, this will be their fourth time which provide some advantages for the firm's knowledge of the properties. 2) Their work has been extremel satisfaa~ryy~ The last reassessment had few requests for review. 3) The Firm carries a high esteem of profession in the Commonwealth and in the Department of Taxation. 4) The price is reasonab!e~. Mr. Agnor said the budget contains enough fUnds to carry the contract for a two year span of time. Mr. Henley Sai~ if reassessments are to be done every two years, the possibility of having employees in the Real Estate Department to handle this should be explored. Mr. Agnor said in discussing the matter of county staff handling the reassessments with Mr. Fred Forber of the Department of Taxation, Mr. Forberg recommended that computerized storage of data be examined before staff is hired. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to accept the recommendation of the County Executive and approve the contract of Wingate Appraisal Service for a total cost of $76,500.00 and study the possibility of h~ring staff to do reassessments after this year. Mrs. David seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meeting) Agenda Item No. 8. Contract--Convention Bureau. Mr. Fisher said today's discussion is the result of a request received from the Convention Bureau for an opportunity to discuss their functions and the possibility of continuing the Convention Bureau. Mr. Joe Teague, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce Board, was present and introduced Mr. Fred Ferguson, executive Vice President of the Chamber. Mr. Ferguson discussed the various goals of the contract and their objectives which are outlined below: GOALS I. Convention Solicitation Objective Advertising: This brings attention to the Charlottesville-Albemarle area as an ideal convention location. Advertising is done through state, regional and national magazines, newspapers and periodicals. Mr. Ferguson felt this is a necessity of the bureau and the benefits outweigh the costs. Group Tour Planning Package: Tourism is promoted through professional offices of the Virginia State Travel Service, statewide Bicentennial centers and travel agents. A list is available for accommodations and historic ~ttractions of the area. Convention Portfolio: This has three phases: (1) the cover; (2) information matters; and (3) booklet on the history of the area and envelopes for brochures. The booklet is not needed because a contract has been taken with Windsor Publications to produce a book with advertisements in it. The portfolio serves as a check list and a guide. Slide Presentation: This serves as a sales tool for conventions and groups and is available for accommodations for convention purposes. Promotion: This is necessary to sponsor travel writers, attend promotional meetings or make presentations for conventions and was used during the Bicentennial. Executive Sales Kit: This is available to area business and public officials who travel and contains the convention portfolio and other materials. Graphics and Reproductions: This is the printing of stats, advertising prints, special brochures or flyers in conjunction with the purpose of the bureau. Map and Display: This is used to entice visitors to the area. only cost involved is the reprinting. The II. Convention Services Objective Ae Tourism Brochure: This is designed to attract organizations by depicting the area's historic and scenic beauty. There has been quite a few requests for this. Be Walking Tour Brochure: This is designed to enable visitors to take a walking tour of the historic court square area and has been a success. Loop Tour Brochure: This was developed to guide visitors around the countryside. Mr. Ferguson felt this should be paid for to assist in the reprinting. Points of Interest Map: The maps are made available to retail stores, motels, police and service stations. me Registration Assistance: This is to serve conventions and is done mainly by high school students. At this time, a slide presentation on the historic aspects of the area which is available for conventions was presented to the Board. Mr. John Hinch, past Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, was present and stated the executive sales kit will be discontinued due to the difficulty of making this available to businessmen and public officials. Mr. Dorrier asked if the brochures and pamphlets could be distributed through the Bicentennial Center and the Chamber. Mr. Ferguson said the'only future costs would be the reprinting of these materials. The Bicentennial Center has brochures. He emphasized that the appropriation made by the City and County does not go for personnel. Mr. Fisher asked the purpose of the tour package. He did not feel that such fits in with conventions. Mr. Ferguson said conventions are becoming a second vacation and he feels they overlap each other. Mr. Fisher felt businesses should pay for the service since they are the rec~ents of the benefits. Mr. Hinch felt it was necessary to understand the economic value to the March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meeting) which would have come to Charlottesville without advertising. Mr. Ferguson did not feel any would have and those planned are for the year 1980. Mrs. David said when the Convention Bureau first requested funding it was present~ a~s~s~a~ u~money~w~houtan~ furt~h~r requests. She could not support the County assuming any more responsibility for such funding. She felt the University, Monticello and the countryside could support themselves and were the best advertisements. Mr. Teague felt the County, City and the Chamber needed to cooperate as a group in the funding. The bureau's aim is to increase tourism and bring more conventions to the area. He then requested the Board's consideration for renewal of the contract. Discussion then followed on the number of places large enough to accommodate a convention Mr. Ferguson said only two are large enough for over four hundred people and the problem with the other hotels is eating and banquet facilities. Mr. Fisher stated if public funds are used for promoting conventions, the next question would be the best way to handle the matter; whether through the County, City, Chamber or jointly. He did not feel the question could be resolved today and suggested further consideration by the Board on the matter. At 12:40 P.M., the Board adjourned for lunch and reconvened at 1:35 P.M. NOT DOCKETED. Mr. Michael Gleason was present and presented to the Board a resolution for adoption of an exchange program with the joint communities of Poggio A Caiano and Prato, Italy. Mrs. David then offered motion to adopt the following resolution: COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA County of Albemarle ~ ~i ~ ~?~ty ~of Char~lottesvmli~e~ .... WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle and City of Charlottesville in the Commonwealth of Virginia were privileged during the American Revolution Bicentennial celebration in 1976, to receive a delegation of distinguished public officials and other citizens representing the communes of Poggio a Caiano and of Prato in Italy; and WHEREAS, those Italian municipalities were the birthplace and homeland of Filippo Mazzei, a renowned historic figure of many accomplishments who enjoyed a close friendship and association with the famous and distinguished citizen of our community, Thomas Jefferson; and WHEREAS, the representative leaders of Poggio a Caiano and Prato and of Albemarle and Charlottesville have indicated their mutual desires to establish a permanent twin-community relationship for the purpose of cultural association and exchange of international goodwill, to include a visit by a delegation of our officials and other citizens to Poggio a Caiano and Prato in the near future; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT Concurrently Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle and the Council of the City of Charlottesville, on behalf of all the citizens of this community, that our acceptance of the proposal for the establishment of such a relationship between our jurisdictions be conveyed to the officials of Poggio a Caiano and Prato with our warmest greetings, and the commemoration of the historic relationship which existed between Mr. Jefferson and Signor Mazzei; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, and the Mayor of the City of Charlottesville be authorized to execute suitably prepared copies of this resolution, which shall be endorsed by the Chairman of the Albemarle-Charlottesville Bicentennial Commission, thereby conveying such acceptance to Poggio a Caiano and Prato, and to advise the appropriate officials of the United States Department of State and the Consulate General of the Italian government, of the respective wishes of our communities in this regard. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Gleason brought to the Board's attention that Mr. Munir Eways resigned from the Sign Commission and the Chamber of Commerce will be submitting a nominee to replace him. Dr. Iachetta offered motion to accept Mr. Eways resignation and an invitation to the Chamber for two nominees. Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 9. Equalization Mr. Fisher welcomed the members of the Equalization Board and noted the County Attorney had prepared the following charge for the Equalization Board: The statutes of Virginia require that a Board of EqUalization be appointed in every locality in Virginia. This Board is independent of, and outside the scope or control by, the ~overnin~ body. T~ f~nt ~t ~ ~nn~t~ hv tb~ d~a ~a ~a~ March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meetinl The fact that under the County Executive form it is appointed by the Board of Supervisors does not place it under their control or authority. Therefore, the Board~of Equalization is free to seek the advice and assistance of the local finance officer, assessor, and County Attorney', but it is also free to follow this advice or not, as it deems proper. There is also available the Office of the State Tax Commissioner for advice and assistance. Title 58 of the Code of Virginia, and Article X of the State Constitution contain the controlling law with respect to appraisement and assessment of taxable property by localities and the functions and duties of the Board of Equalization. These should be consulted; a copy of a book containing all of these laws is available in the Office of the Director of Finance. In general terms, the duty of the Board of Equalization is to see that there is equality of appraisement and assessment of properties of similar value in the County in order that the burden of taxation is borne equally by the owners of properties of equal value, within each class of taxable property. In other words, it is not your function to see that property is appraised at its true value, but to see that it is appraised at the same value as other, similar property of like value. Put still another way, it is not your function to conduct a general reappraisement of the property in the County, even though you may feel that the general trend of appraisement is higher or lower than true market value, but to see that as among themselves prmperties of similar value are appraised as equally as possible. The reason for this is that the Board of Equalization is not equipped nor does it have the time, between its appointment and the deadline for completion of its work, to conduct a reappraisal of the entire County. This is the function of the County Assessor under the supervision of the State Tax Commissioner. The State Code basically prescribes your procedures; you and your Chairman will establish your own rules for conducting your meetings. Because your work has to mesh with the schedule of the County Assessment and Tax Offices, we recommend that you keep in mind the following frame of time and events under which the property tax system must work: During January and early February of a given year, every taxpayer whose assessment has been changed to affect the next tax bill due on or before December 5 of the given year, receives in the mail a notice of change in assessment. This notice shows the old appraisal and the new appraisal. The not~e also contains a list of days and hours, in February, during which a taxpayer may appear in the Assessor's office to go over his assessment and to present any evidence or argument to justify correction. At these informal hearings, if the taxpayer persuades the assessor that the appraisal is in error, the Assessor's office may make a correction without further formality. If, however, the taxpayer wishes to question the appraisal further, his next step is to seek a hearing before the Board of Equalization. The Board's hearings have to be advertised in advance. The County tax rate, on the other hand, which is predicated on a comparison of the value of the taxable property in the County with the County budget for that year, must be set on or before June 30. It is therefore requested of you, if at all. possible, that you set your hearings to begin on or about March 1, of the year in which you are appointed, and that your decision be finalized and the Director of Finance, no later than June 30. In fact the earlier you can finalize these decisions, prior to June 30, the more efficient w~ll be the County staff's work in preparing the necessary computations for the Board of Supervisors to establish and announce the tax rate. With respect to hearings concerning new construction, these can be finalized any time up until December 31 of the given year, and therefore it is recommended that these be handled separately from other categories of property. The following schedule with respect to new construction, is recommended: Notice of New Assessment Hearings by Real Estate Department Appeals and Hearings to Equalization Tickets Due Date September ~ September 15 to October 1 October 1 to October 15 October 20 to November 1 December 5 Again, the foregoing comments are submitted only for the purpose of informing you how your work coincides with.that of the other offices involved in the tax process. The governing body and the County staff do not intend, by giving you this information, in any way to influence you in your deliberations nor to discourage you if you wish to seek other advice as to the nature of your functions and responsibilities. However, the persons in the offices of the County Assessor, Director of Finance and County Attorney are at your disposal to assist you and answer your questions, if called upon. · ~-~. ~77 CRe~ular-All Day Meeting) Mrs. Marilyn Edmunds, Chairman of the Equalization Board, was present and noted only fifteen reassessment requests received to this date. She then introduced the,following members of the Equalization Board: Mrs. Ethel Kindrick, Messrs. John T. Sinclair, F. Pierson Scott and John O. Higginson. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to adopt the above charge to the-Board of Equalization. Mrs. David seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 10. Report of Committee Appointed to Inspect Physical Education Facilities at Albemarle High School. Dr. Tachetta, member of the Space Committee, was in agreement with Mr. Roudabush as to the needs for physical education, facilities at Albemarle High School. He favored that needs be carefully assessed and the School Board then present a total proposal for the schools physical education facilities with long range planning in mind. Mrs. David felt the School Board had studied the problem carefully and was convinced that this problem needed to be taken.care of immediately. Mr. Fisher felt the question was whether the Board should respond to an individual request before studying the other needs in the school system. He felt the School Board should examine their five year capital needs and the amount of money needed. He agreed with Mr. Roudabush about· examining all the needs because if the funds were taken out of revenue sharing money for this project then the other school needs would be hard to get financing for particularly through a bond referendum. Mrs. David said the School Board had suggested the use of Literary Funds. Mr. Fisher said he was not sure if any money was available from that source. Dr. Iachetta said the proposed figure was $500,000.00 and he was unsure from what he saw if that amount was sufficient. Mr. Roudabush was against spending that amount and then finding out more money is needed. He was in favor of meeting the need on a long term proposition. Dr. Iachetta said professional assistance will be needed and without any plans or details available he could not see the project being completed by September. Mr'. Fisher emphasized that the total capital needs from the School Board should be determined and perhaps an appropriation is needed for the planning. Dr. Iachetta felt the project should be moved along rapidly but felt in order to have proper facilities other schools should be examined. Dr. Ronald Bauerle, member of the School Board, was present and said the sketch submitted was just an idea. He noted a construction management type program where a contruction firm representing a national company hires an architect, puts the buildings up and does all the work once the contract is completed. He felt this approach would be much faster. Since most activities are outdoors at the start of school, the facility is not cr_tlcally needed by September. He agreed that the whole capmtal outlay construction for the school system should be considered and the committee has been working on a report to be submitted to the School Board. The reason this project has been put in a crash situation~ is due to the severe overcrowding in the schOol. -~-~-~"~~_ ~ _.- --~_,.o-~ not ~cp*~ u?~~~,~e,~.~n~.~ ~~_ '~,,,?~ri_~,~-e~. The Committee would like to have some committment with a ballpark figure for the budget so an architect would know what amount he has to work within. Mr. Fisher responded by preferring to know the bottom line figure~from an architect first and then a request for money. DiScussion then followed on what the minimum needs would be before any approriation is discussed. Dr. Bauerle noted the capital needs should be completed within the next month. Dr. Iachetta felt the Board should authorize some funding for planning that is necessary. Mr. Fisher said since there is'a balance left in the capital outlay budget for planning purposes then the committee needs a committment from this Board for approval to go ahead and start the planning then return with more information. Dr. Bauerle was opposed to a bond referendum due to the length of time necessary for such. Since the Literary Fund is specifically for projects of this type and the maximum loan is $700,000.00, he felt it would be the cheapest method of funding. ~Dr. Iachetta felt the most important thing is to establish the need. Mr. Fisher felt 6he School Board would appreciate a concurrence from this Board for planning of the facility with the funds they presently have and then return to the Board with more information on methods of financing and how to go about the matter. Mrs. Elizabeth Rosenblum, School Board member was present and noted that this school has one-fifth of the school population and felt the need is critical. She did not believe a bond referendum was the way to solve this problem. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to concur with the School Board in the need to improve the critical physical education facilities at Albemarle High School and plan to meet the need and come back with a concrete proposal of how it should be met with the minimum dollar figures determined. Mrs. David seconded the motion. Dr. Iachetta s~ggested the long term capital needs also be addressed. Mr. Fisher asked if the School Board has taken action on the matter by placing it in the tod priority. Dr. Bauerle said yes. Mr. Dorr~r a~d that t~ ~ ~hn,~ ~v~ Mr. Roudabush, Chairman of the Space Committee, was amazed at the inadequacy of the facilities at Albemarle High School and noted the most impressive part was the number of classes trying to use the gym at one time. He felt there was a need at the school but was unsure if it was a proper time to get into the improvement program without assessing the total needs of all the facilities in the County schools. Probably the best way to finance an improvement program of this nature would be through a bond referendum to take care of all the needs having a top priority at one time. However, he did no5 feel it could be taken care of by the start of school in the fall. Mr. Roudabush suggested a total study be made of all the schools before considering just one. March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Da~ Meetin~ Roll was then called on the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. ..Dr. Bauerle asked the Board's feelings about the construction management approach he mentioned earlier No one objected. Agenda Item No. 12. Lottery Permits. Mr. Agnor said the lottery permit application for the Arnold Air Society was deferred from March 2 for clarification of the use of funds. The applicant rewrote the purpose of the proceeds of the games. The County Attorney's office has reviewed the revised application and according to State Law the Society is qualified for a lottery permit. Mr. Dorrier then offered motion to approve a lottery permit for the Arnold Air Society for calendar year 1977 in accordance with the rules and regulations set forth by the Board. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following reco'rded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Mr. Roudabush offered motion to approve a lottery permit application for the Cove Garden Ruritan Club for calendar year 1977 in accordance with the rules and regulations set forth by the Board. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS' None. Agenda Item No. 13. Report of the Department of Social Services for the month of January, 1977, was received pursuant to Virginia Code Section 63.1-52. Agenda Item No. 14. Statements of Expenses for the Director of~Finance, Commonwealth's Attorney and Sheriff's Department for the month of February,.1977, was.received. Upon '~these Statements were'~approVed~as'presented. motion by Mrs. David, seconded by Mr. Dorrie!r, Roll was called and carried by the following recorded'vote: AYES: MrS. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher~, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No 15. Statement of Expenses for the Regional Jail for the month of February, 1977, was received. Upon motion by Mrs. David, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, the statement was approved as presented. Roll was carried and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs..~Dorrier, Fisher, HenleY,~ Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 16. Statement of expenses incurred in the maintenance and' operation of the Regional Jail for the month of February, 1977, along with summary statements of prisoner days, statement of jail physician and statement of salaries for the paramedics and classification officer were received. Upon motion by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorrier, these statements were approved as read. The motion carried by the following reCorded vote: ~ AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 17. Resolution- Habitual 0ffenders ~ Mr. Fisher noted this as a continuance of a discUssion from March 2 about repeated offenders in the County. At 2:47 P.M., Mr..St. John reqUested an executive session. Motion was offered by Mr. Henley to discuss legal matters, seconded by Mr Roudabush and same carriad by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, FiSher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. The Board reconvened at 3:15 P.M. and continued with the discussion of agenda item number seventeen. Mr. Fisher said the Board has come to a conclusion that involving itself in any action in the judicial law enforcement system would be inappropriate and will continue to support the law enforcement personnel of the County as they have in the past. Therefore, no action will be taken on this matter. Agenda Item No. 18. Appointment: Albemarle County Service Authority. Motion was offered by Mr. Henley to reappoint Mr. John L. Spencer to the Albemarle County Servic2 Authority Board of Directors; this new term to expire on April 16, 1981. Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meeting) Mr. Agnor noted the Library Board had an audit revealed a $48,496 carryover balance with a refund t this experience, the Board decided to examine 1973~ situation occurred. In doing this, it was found tha of time had an accumulative balance due of $6,567.00 by the same amount. Therefore, he recommended that $6,567.00 so a check can be written to the City of C offered by Mrs. David to adopt the following resolut made of fiscal year 1976 and such o the County for $18,135.00. From 1974 and 1975 to see if the same t the County over the three-year span and the City had overpaid their share an appropriation be approved for larlottesvi!le. MOtion was then ion: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $6,567.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and transferred to Code 18B.3 ~or underpayment to the Library for Fiscal Years 1973~ 1974 and 197~. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the follOWing recorded vote: 097 AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of an interim report from the consultants working on the renovation of the post office as a regional library; this being Phase I of work-authorized on December 15, 1976. Mr. Lloyd Smith, Chairman of the Library Board~ has requested the Board's concurrence in proceeding with the more detailed part of the study since the report is favorable to this point. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to approve ~.2~ proceeding further with the study. Mrs. David seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 18B. Discussion: 1980 Census. Mr. Robert Tucker, Director of Planning, was present and noted the Census Bureau contacted him recommending that the County be divided into census tracts rather than enumeration districts for the 1980 census. The benefit for having census tracts is to have more and better data. Mr. Fisher was opposed to all the questions asked in taking a-~censU~ ~Mrs. David asked if census tracts were smaller units than enumeration districts. Mr. Tucker said it basically depends on the popuIation and there has to be a minimum population of 2,500 in each tract with a total of 40,000 to divide into census tracts. Mr. Agnor was opposed due to the time frame involved because they are asking for a response within a week and to delineate census tracts by the end of April. The data in a census tract is more useful for planning purposes but involves more questions for the citizens. After some discussion by the Board, the consensus was to take no action on the matter and remain with enumeration districts. Agenda Item No. 19. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Mr. Ray Jones, Director of Finance, was present and summarized the contents of the report by the United States Department of Interior, National Park SerVice, Shenandoah National Park, Luray~ Virginia. This report was submitted by Mr. Robert Jacobsen, National Park Superintendent and is to be used during the preparation of a~General Management Plan. Mr. Jones said the 190,000 acre park presently has, about 15,000 acres in Albemarle County and the second expansion would increase the acreage to about 25~000 He then discussed the real estate value of land tha~'~Would be taken into the park. Mr. Jones said the report states that the Federal Government will not appropriate money for the acquisition of the property but in talking with the Park Superintendent, Mr. Jacobsen's comments were opposite to the contents of the report in that he feels expansion is Mr. Fisher recommended a resolution in opposition to any exD~nsion of the Park be adopted and sent to the Denver Office of the National Park Service with a~cover letter to Mr. Jacobsen as well as the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, the City, and Planning District Commissions of other affected counties, Senators Byrd and Scott and Congressman Robinson. Dr. Iachetta concurred and offered motion to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is in receipt of a draft Statement for Management for Shenandoah National Park, Virginia, dated January 1977 submitted with letter from Robert R. Jacobsen, Park Superintendent, said letter dated February 2, 1977; and WHEREAS, the map attached to the proposal for expansion of the Park is scaled at approximately five miles per inch, therefore the County is unable to identify acreages in Albemarle County which are included in the proposed expansion, the economic impact on property owners of individual parcels, or the fiscal impact on the County in regard to future loss of revenues; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the following conditions be met by the Park Service: No further expansion of the original Park boundary be recommended until a fiscal and environmental impact statement on the expansion is made available to each locality affected by that expansion. March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meeting) e The Park Service should provide a map scaled at 600 feet per inch prior to further action on the proposal, with listings of current owners in Albemarle County. Affected property owners should be provided copies of the proposed plan. No expansion of current boundary until localities are made payments in lieu of receiving taxes on existing Federal lands. e Joint public hearings by Federal, State and local governments be conducted in each locality prior to submission of any request for expansion to the Department of Interior, Congress or Congressional Committee~ with each affected property owner being notified at Federal expense of the public hearings. The Federal Government or Park Service assume responsibility for litter removal, fence damage and property damage (on properties adjacent to the current and proposed boundary) caused by citizens utilizing the Appalachian Trail and Park. 'Park Service provide sanitary l~ndfills within the Park boundary for trash disposal rather than using open dumps. Property owners be adequately compensated for existing and planned reforestation programs as well as loss of income from grazing lands, private recreation facilities and timberlands. The Board of Supervisors be apprised of future developments on the proposed expansion prior to official action. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the Park Service is unable to meet the above conditions, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia is opposed to any further expansion of the Park boundaries into Albemarle County. Dr. Iachetta seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Henley noted receipt of a letter from Miss Helen Skiles commending Mr. Ira Drumhe!ler, Deputy Dog Warden, for action taken recently on behalf of a citizen in Crozet. Mr. Fisher noted Senate Bill 735 which continues the moratorium on annexation which is before the Governor and recommended that the Board adopt a resolution urging the Governor's signature for such. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following resoluti¢ WHEREAS, this Board finds that unless a moratorium on annexation is continued until the General Assembly of Virginia should have another opportunity to enact appropriate legislation on the subject of City/County relationships, many communities~ both cities and counties, could suffer irreparable damage as a result of the necessity to prosecute or defend annexation suits under the present unsatisfactory state of the law; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, respectfully and emphatically implores the Honorable Mills E. Godwin, Jr., Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, to sign into law Senate Bill 735 to avoid a lapse of the existing moratorium on annexation. Mr. Roudabush seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Mr. Henley left at 4:00 P.M. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a letter from Mr'; Louie Scribner of the Economic Development Commission dated March 2, 1977. The letter requests approval by the Board of a change in the by-laws of the Commission, Mr. Fisher requested that Mr. Scribner be invited to the April 13 meeting to discuss the changes. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of an application from Scottsvi!le Bus Lines for a change in routes served which has been filed with the State Corporation Commission. A hearing on this application is to be held on April 10 at the State Office. ...... I:1 . . 2 _ Jz ......... J: ...... . J March 9, 1977 (Regular-All Day Meeting) Mr. Fisher noted a meeting to be held by the Compensation Board On.April 11, 1977 at 8:30 A.M. for r~ceiving information in which the Commwealth's Attorney, Commissioner of Revenue, Sheriffs or Treasurers may wish to be present to support their salary and expense requests. Mr. Agnor said the budget will be completed by that date and that can be shown to the Compensation Board. Dr. Iachetta noted the Seminole Trail Volunteer Fire Company has begun training people and a site plan for theirvbUild!ng has been completed. Mrs. David said she had checked with the members of ~the Charlottesville-Albemarle Planning Commission for a Cultural Center a~d found that their interest as diminished. Mr. Agnor said as of March 14, Ms. Marcia Mashaw will be the Emergency~Ser~ic. es Coordinator. ~At 4:15 P.M., motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to adjourn this meeting until March 16~ 1977, at 1:30 P.M. in the Board Room. Mrs. David seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher~ Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Henley.